162 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



boro, Md., and from Williamsport, Md , where it attacked the peach, and 

 from the District of Cokimbia. As far as known to me, the N. American 

 Hterature contains nothing more concerning this beetle. 



In Europe the beetle is first quoted by F. Sturm (Catalog, meiner 

 Insecten Sammlung, 1826, "p. 194), with the manuscript name, Scolytus 

 haemorrhous Megerle. In V. Kollar (Naturgeschichte der schaedl. In- 

 secten, 1837, P- 270, and English transl. p. 263) the co-editor, J. Schmid- 

 berger, gives about the best account in existence of the beetle and its 

 habits, with the same name, 6". haemoirhot^s. Professor Ratzeburg, 1837, 

 Forstinsecten. vol. i., p. 187, and Ed. ii., 1839, p. 230, gives in a note a 

 description with the name Eccoptogaster rtigulosns Koch, and quotes as 

 synonym, Scolytus haemorrhous Ulrich. A good figure of the beetle is 

 given pi. X., f. 10, and of the craddle and galleries in the bark, pi. 17, f. 

 4. The name Ulrich is explained by Schmidberger's statement that the 

 beetle had been determined for him by Mr. Ulrich as 6". haemorrhous 

 Megerle, and the article begins with this full name of the beetle. The 

 name Koch, used by Ratzeburg, is a manuscript name. Mr. Koch, 

 probably a student of the Professor, has nothing published. Nevertheless 

 the beetle has been often quoted as S. rugulosus Koch, and only in later 

 years as S. rugulosus Ratzeb. I do not understand why Ratzeburg has 

 not adopted Schmidberger's name. That he has known this publication 

 (though of the same year) is proved by the quotation of Ulrich's name. 

 I am not able to see Schmidberger's work (Beitraege zur Obstbaumzucht 

 und zur Naturgeschichte der — schaedHchen Insecten, 1827 to 1836), which 

 probably contains the same statements as. in 1837. The description by 

 Ratzeburg without the figures would not allow a surer determination than 

 those of Schmidberger, who gives besides a full history of the life and 

 habits of the beetle. During the following time ihe literature on S. rugu- 

 losus is large. I have compared Noerdlinger, Letzner, Chapnis, Eichoff, 

 Chapmann, Schmidt-goebel, for the observations on its habits. It attacks 

 the branches, and often mere twigs, of living trees belonging to the genera 

 Pyrus and Prunus, in great numbers, so that the infested part of the tree 

 must perish, because it cannot continue to grow with injured bark and 

 strongly pierced sap-wood. It appears to multiply very fast, and a double 

 brood is supposed to occur. A few females laid so many eggs that the 

 larvae produced from them destroyed the bark of the stem, nearly a foot 

 long. They cannot easily be eradicated, or at least diminished in num- 

 bers, but by removing and burning the trees attacked by them. 



